In an article I wrote for the June 2014 issue of The Cleveland Bar Journal, entitled, “A Free Online Guide for Researching the Ohio Constitution”, I discuss why knowledge of the Ohio Constitution is important for Ohio lawyers and law students. A recent dissent by Ohio Supreme Court Justice Paul E. Pfeifer drives this […]
The Ohio Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal and cross-appeal of a Tenth District Court of Appeals ruling ordering that the trial court must conduct a hearing as to whether an Ohio Budget Bill, Am. Sub. H. B. No. 153 , 129th General Assembly violated the One Subject Rule of the Ohio Constitution, because it
Ohio Supreme Court to Hear One Subject Rule Case re. Prison Privatization Read Post »
In re A.G., 2014-Ohio-2597 A teenager does not have a right to attend and participate in a visitation hearing under the Open Courts provision of the Ohio Constitution, Article 1, Section 16 or under due process provisions of the U.S. Constitution. Docket,Oral Argument Video,Oral Argument Summary, Opinion Summary.
Teen’s Constitutional Rights Not Violated When Barred From Visitation Hearing Read Post »
Thomas Suddes asserts that the one subject rule, Article II, Section 15(D) of the Ohio Constitution, needs to be strictly enforced. Legislators seem to easily get around the one subject rule, particularly in budget bills. See Cleveland.com: A Slinky is more rigid than Ohio legislation’s one-subject rule: Thomas Suddes
Recent Commentary on Ohio’s One Subject Rule Read Post »
The Ohio Supreme Court heard arguments today in an appeal filed by Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc. and City of Toledo concerning the constitutionality of administrative hearings for traffic camera tickets. Argument Video. Oral Argument Preview Docket for Supreme Court Case No. 2013-1277
Ohio Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Traffic Camera Case Read Post »
The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court finding that liberal group ProgressOhio lacked standing to challenge JobsOhio legislation. ProgressOhio.org, Inc. v. JobsOhio, 2014 Ohio 2382, The court interpreted Ohio Constitution Article IV, Section 4(B) which concerns the jurisdiction of the common pleas court. The court further found that the provisions of the
The following meetings will be held Thursday, June 12, 2014 at the Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio: 9:00 a.m. Bill of Rights & Voting Committee, Statehouse Room 311 – See Agenda below Legislative Branch and Executive Branch Committee, Statehouse Room 114, Presentations by Dr. John C. Green, Distinguished Professor, Political Science and Director, Ray C. Bliss Institute
June 2014 Meetings for the Ohio Constitutional Modernization Commission (updated) Read Post »
Earlier this month, Yes for Ohio’s Energy Future filed a proposed ballot initiative with the Ohio Attorney General, The Ohio Clean Energy Initiative. The Attorney General rejected this initiative petition, based on insufficient signatures. This recently filed initiative is similar but not identical to a previously filed and approved initiative, The Ohio Clean Energy Initiative,
Revised Ohio Clean Energy Initiative Rejected by AG Read Post »
Oaktree Condominium Association v. Hallmark Building Company, 2014-Ohio-1937. Construction statute of repose, codified in R.C. 2305.131,is unconstitutional as applied to plaintiff who filed a claim for damages after the statute’s effective date but plaintiff’s claim arose before the effective date. Application of the statute of repose to bar plaintiff’s lawsuit violates the Ohio Constitution, Article
Retroactivity Provision Violated by Application of Construction Statute of Repose Read Post »
An Akron Beacon Journal editorial states that Ohio can not wait for the Ohio Constitutional Modernization Commission or the legislature to reform redistricting, and a citizen-led initiative petition drive should be started. See Redistricting reform? Start the petition drive. Another interesting article on redistricting and term limits appeared in the Columbus Dispatch.
Initiative Petition on Redistricting? Read Post »